Skip to main content
Log In | Register

TR Memescape


Topic: Post Flood Population Growth (Read 3492 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • 9,897

  • 66

Post Flood Population Growth
Some of those 101 "evidences" (does anyone other than creationists use "evidence" in the plural?) are hilarious.

My favorite:
Quote
96. Human population growth. Less than 0.5% p.a. growth from six people 4,500 years ago would produce today's population. Where are all the people? if we have been here much longer?

Yep, one has to wonder what happened to all the mice, cockroaches, spiders, and pretty much every other species with a generational cycle of less than 15 years. We should be overrun with mice, cats, dogs, otters, pheasants, rats, foxes, wolves, elephants (oops, sorry, they were slaughtered by mistake by Savory, almost to extinction), whales, salmon, silverfish, lice, ants, bees, wasps, etc.
Should have been overun with them centuries ago.

Oh, wait.
I love this one too.

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-timeline/how-does-mans-history-fit-with-the-biblical-timeline/
Quote
Using God's Word as authoritative
Major event Date (using Ussher)

Creation 4004 BC
Curse 4004 BC (Day 10 after creation)
Global Flood 2348 BC
Tower Babel 2242 BC
Egypt began After 2242 BC but prior to Abraham going to Egypt (Genesis 12)
Call of Abraham 1922 BC
Ice Age peak 1848 BC (500 years after the Flood)
Time of the Judges (Moses was first) 1491 BC (God appearing to Moses in the burning bush)
Time of the Kings (Saul was the first) 1095 BC
Split kingdom 975 BC
Christ was born ~4 BC

Populationyears after flood = Populationyear of flood X growth rateyears after flood

6 people in 2348 BC, 7.4 billion people in 2016 AD, growth rate = 1.00481 (0.481% per year)

At that growth rate, let's see what the world's total population was at the times of other biblical events, per the authority of AiG.

Building of the Tower of Babel in 2242 BC, 106 years after the Flood:  10 people

Moses seeing the burning bush in 1491 BC, 857 years after the Flood: 367 people

Saul made king in 1095 BC, 1,253 years after the Flood: 2451 people

Something must be wrong.  Better check the math.

2016 AD, 4,363 years after the Flood: 7,420,255,522 people.

Seems to check out.

Some of those 101 "evidences" (does anyone other than creationists use "evidence" in the plural?) are hilarious.

My favorite:
Quote
96. Human population growth. Less than 0.5% p.a. growth from six people 4,500 years ago would produce today's population. Where are all the people? if we have been here much longer?

Yep, one has to wonder what happened to all the mice, cockroaches, spiders, and pretty much every other species with a generational cycle of less than 15 years. We should be overrun with mice, cats, dogs, otters, pheasants, rats, foxes, wolves, elephants (oops, sorry, they were slaughtered by mistake by Savory, almost to extinction), whales, salmon, silverfish, lice, ants, bees, wasps, etc.
Should have been overun with them centuries ago.

Oh, wait.
I love this one too.

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-timeline/how-does-mans-history-fit-with-the-biblical-timeline/
Quote
Using God's Word as authoritative
Major event Date (using Ussher)

Creation 4004 BC
Curse 4004 BC (Day 10 after creation)
Global Flood 2348 BC
Tower Babel 2242 BC
Egypt began After 2242 BC but prior to Abraham going to Egypt (Genesis 12)
Call of Abraham 1922 BC
Ice Age peak 1848 BC (500 years after the Flood)
Time of the Judges (Moses was first) 1491 BC (God appearing to Moses in the burning bush)
Time of the Kings (Saul was the first) 1095 BC
Split kingdom 975 BC
Christ was born ~4 BC

Populationyears after flood = Populationyear of flood X growth rateyears after flood

6 people in 2348 BC, 7.4 billion people in 2016 AD, growth rate = 1.00481 (0.481% per year)

At that growth rate, let's see what the world's total population was at the times of other biblical events, per the authority of AiG.

Building of the Tower of Babel in 2242 BC, 106 years after the Flood:  10 people

Moses seeing the burning bush in 1491 BC, 857 years after the Flood: 367 people

Saul made king in 1095 BC, 1,253 years after the Flood: 2451 people

Something must be wrong.  Better check the math.

2016 AD, 4,363 years after the Flood: 7,420,255,522 people.

Seems to check out.

I don't know much about Dean W ... but I suspect he's a professional scientist of some sort.  Let's see how good his science is here.  6 people in 2348 BC ... Shem, Ham and Japheth and their wives ... we know from the Biblical record that they all had kids but we don't know how many ... Jewish tradition (footnote in Josephus) says that Adam and Eve had something like 35 kids if I recall correctly ... I doubt that Shem, Ham and Japheth had that many ... let's make a wild guess of 10 each.  If they were all pregnant on the ark and gave birth to their firstborn in Year 1 after landing, then that's Population P1 = 9, which is growth rate in Year 1 of G1 = 9 / 6 - 1 = 0.5 or 50%.  (I'm leaving out Mr. and Mrs. Noah) If we assume for argument sake that each couple has a kid every two years thereafter for a total of 20 years of child bearing, then by Year 20, we have P20 = 30 + 6 = 36, which is a growth rate of G36 = (36 / 6)^(1 / 20) - 1 = 0.094 (9.4%) if I'm doing my math correctly.

Do you see where I'm going with this?

  • Fenrir
  • Needs a Life
  • 616

  • 191

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #1
Down the drain like usual?
It's what plants crave.

  • 1,872

  • 270

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #2
Yes. I see you bagdering off as fast as you can. I also see you predicting a global population of something like 300bn by now.
Why do I bother?

  • 9,897

  • 66

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #3
I did this very hurriedly and there's probably some big errors ... but ...

Assuming 10 kids per couple, young men marry their sisters and cousins (not a problem back then) and they start their families at age 15 ... we have a population of 936 already by 2300 BC



  • Last Edit: December 31, 2016, 04:27:33 AM by Dave Hawkins

  • Faid
  • Needs a Life
  • 4,002

  • 717

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #4
How many of those 936 people built Stonehenge?
Who even made the rule that we cannot group ducks and fish together for the simple reason that they are both aquatic? If I want to group them that way and it serves my purpose then I can jolly well do it however I want to and it is still a nested hierarchy and you can't tell me that it's not.

  • 9,897

  • 66

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #5
I can already see one error I made but I don't think it's huge ... Columns F and G would ramp up and ramp down ... instead of 15 15 15 ... etc. ... it would be more like 1 3 6 9 12 15 15 15 ... 15 15 12 9 6 3 1 ...

Anyway, I've made my point ... that Dean W's figures are totally unrealistic.

  • Faid
  • Needs a Life
  • 4,002

  • 717

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #6
But evryone marrying their sisters and cousins and having 10 kids and everyone surviving is totes realistic.
Who even made the rule that we cannot group ducks and fish together for the simple reason that they are both aquatic? If I want to group them that way and it serves my purpose then I can jolly well do it however I want to and it is still a nested hierarchy and you can't tell me that it's not.

  • VoxRat
  • Needs a Life
  • wtactualf
  • 5,973

  • 1146

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #7
jesus christ this thread
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

  • Pingu
  • Needs a Life
  • 7,848

  • 1269

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #8
I thought you were too busy to fix your blog post on Popper, Dave?

Quote from: Dave's blog
Popper described science as that which is controlled by natural law (Meyer calls this 'nomological', or law-based science) and it is only later that he spoke of 'historical' science

Maybe fix that before you start attempting to defend Don Batten's idiotic "evidences" for a young earth?

  • 9,897

  • 66

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #9
Do you never tire of trying to control other people by trying to put guilt trips on them?

  • Seven Popes
  • Needs a Life
  • So would the opposite be a good-ger?
  • 942

  • 154

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #10
Do you never tire of trying to control other people by trying to put guilt trips on them?
It's your lie, tell it how you want.
You may hear people saying how fast they can make compost -- some say only a few weeks. Stay away from these people as they don't know what they're talking about. --Humanure handbook

  • VoxRat
  • Needs a Life
  • wtactualf
  • 5,973

  • 1146

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #11
Do you never tire of trying to control other people by trying to put guilt trips on them?
Isn't she echoing exactly what YOU said a few posts back?
Didn't people have better things to to than hold poor Davie's feet to the fire (while he's heroically giving it his all to save the planet)?

Oh, wait.
Davie's male and God (and Nature) wants him to control
Pingu's female, and suggesting people behave ethically trying to control other people is pretty much the equivalent of strapping on a strap-on.

n/m
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

  • 9,897

  • 66

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #12
I can already see one error I made but I don't think it's huge ... Columns F and G would ramp up and ramp down ... instead of 15 15 15 ... etc. ... it would be more like 1 3 6 9 12 15 15 15 ... 15 15 12 9 6 3 1 ...

Anyway, I've made my point ... that Dean W's figures are totally unrealistic.
So do we now agree that Dean W was way off base?

  • Seven Popes
  • Needs a Life
  • So would the opposite be a good-ger?
  • 942

  • 154

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #13
In other words, you disgree with the population growth statistics used by the YEC website? Because that's what Dean used.
You may hear people saying how fast they can make compost -- some say only a few weeks. Stay away from these people as they don't know what they're talking about. --Humanure handbook

  • VoxRat
  • Needs a Life
  • wtactualf
  • 5,973

  • 1146

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #14
Anyway, I've made my point ... that Dean W's figures are totally unrealistic.
So do we now agree that Dean W was way off base?


  psssst....   dave....


                                                                                         that's kind of the point.

"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

  • Pingu
  • Needs a Life
  • 7,848

  • 1269

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #15
Do you never tire of trying to control other people by trying to put guilt trips on them?

Interesting you see it that way.



  • Pingu
  • Needs a Life
  • 7,848

  • 1269

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #16
I can already see one error I made but I don't think it's huge ... Columns F and G would ramp up and ramp down ... instead of 15 15 15 ... etc. ... it would be more like 1 3 6 9 12 15 15 15 ... 15 15 12 9 6 3 1 ...

Anyway, I've made my point ... that Dean W's figures are totally unrealistic.
So do we now agree that Dean W was way off base?

And what was his "base" Dave?

Do you now see why Don Batten's 96th  "evidence" for YEC is so hilarious?

  • Pingu
  • Needs a Life
  • 7,848

  • 1269

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #17
Do you never tire of trying to control other people by trying to put guilt trips on them?
Isn't she echoing exactly what YOU said a few posts back?
Didn't people have better things to to than hold poor Davie's feet to the fire (while he's heroically giving it his all to save the planet)?

Oh, wait.
Davie's male and God (and Nature) wants him to control
Pingu's female, and suggesting people behave ethically trying to control other people is pretty much the equivalent of strapping on a strap-on.

n/m

inorite?

  • Fenrir
  • Needs a Life
  • 616

  • 191

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #18
I can already see one error I made but I don't think it's huge ... Columns F and G would ramp up and ramp down ... instead of 15 15 15 ... etc. ... it would be more like 1 3 6 9 12 15 15 15 ... 15 15 12 9 6 3 1 ...

Anyway, I've made my point ... that I'm a halfwitted anencephalic clown.
It's what plants crave.

  • Pingu
  • Needs a Life
  • 7,848

  • 1269

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #19
Still, realising he totally goofed on Popper, and realising in a minute or so that he totally goofed on Don Batten, maybe will finally get him started down the sunnier slope of Mount Stupid.


  • Seven Popes
  • Needs a Life
  • So would the opposite be a good-ger?
  • 942

  • 154

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #20
I can already see one error I made but I don't think it's huge ... Columns F and G would ramp up and ramp down ... instead of 15 15 15 ... etc. ... it would be more like 1 3 6 9 12 15 15 15 ... 15 15 12 9 6 3 1 ...

Anyway, I've made my point ... that Dean W's figures are totally unrealistic.
So do we now agree that Dean W was way off base?

And what was his "base" Dave?

Do you now see why Don Batten's 96th  "evidence" for YEC is so hilarious?
The tard is flowing like water again, good times.  He's looking at the Economics of goatdozer thread, I assume he's composing a delightfully racist response.
You may hear people saying how fast they can make compost -- some say only a few weeks. Stay away from these people as they don't know what they're talking about. --Humanure handbook

  • Faid
  • Needs a Life
  • 4,002

  • 717

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #21
Do you never tire of trying to control other people by trying to put guilt trips on them?
You think people who try to explain to you the importance of admitting to, and correcting your mistakes, aim to "control" you and put you on "guilt trips"?

Jesus. What a spoiled, immature man-child.
Who even made the rule that we cannot group ducks and fish together for the simple reason that they are both aquatic? If I want to group them that way and it serves my purpose then I can jolly well do it however I want to and it is still a nested hierarchy and you can't tell me that it's not.

  • 9,897

  • 66

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #22
I can already see one error I made but I don't think it's huge ... Columns F and G would ramp up and ramp down ... instead of 15 15 15 ... etc. ... it would be more like 1 3 6 9 12 15 15 15 ... 15 15 12 9 6 3 1 ...

Anyway, I've made my point ... that Dean W's figures are totally unrealistic.
So do we now agree that Dean W was way off base?

And what was his "base" Dave?

Do you now see why Don Batten's 96th  "evidence" for YEC is so hilarious?
It's not hilarious at all.  It's just "hand grenade math" which works for Don's purpose ... which is to show the hilarity of the Old Earth Model.  What's hilarious is the number you would get if you plugged in 0.5% into the formula and ran it for 1 million years. 

THAT would be hilarious!

So you've entirely missed the point of Don Batten's statement.

  • 9,897

  • 66

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #23
Dean W ineptly - or dishonestly - tried to use Don Batten's hand grenade math which was intended to show the hilarity of 0.5% population growth over 1 million + years to try to show that there wouldn't be enough population to build the Tower of Babel.

See?

  • Faid
  • Needs a Life
  • 4,002

  • 717

Re: Post Flood Population Growth
Reply #24
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
  • Last Edit: December 31, 2016, 07:17:48 AM by Faid
Who even made the rule that we cannot group ducks and fish together for the simple reason that they are both aquatic? If I want to group them that way and it serves my purpose then I can jolly well do it however I want to and it is still a nested hierarchy and you can't tell me that it's not.